Thoughts on LTE on an Apple Watch 3

The Apple Watch Series 3 is rumored to come out later this year and one of the features that it is rumored to have, in additional an “ambient” mode where the screen stays on in some fashion to just display the time, is LTE. I have LTE obviously on my iPhone and my iPad Pro has the chip inside even though I don’t pay for monthly service on it. I’ve been thinking about the things that could get me to pay a monthly fee for a smartwatch and this is what I came up:

1. Music Streaming: Android Wear does this with the LG Watch Sport and Huawei Watch 2. Users can stream Google Play Music and Spotify. The use case for this would be to be able to listen to music on the go without having to bring your phone, namely when you are out running or in the gym. It would be really cool to just go off on a run with my keys and AirPods.
2. Messaging: Android Wear also does this through the carrier, but Apple could push text messages around via iMessage much easier. This would be a useful feature to have for sure since most of my communications are via iMessage, Facebook Messenger, and Microsoft Teams.
3. Phone and FaceTime Audio Calls: This one would definitely require the Apple Watch Series 3 to have a louder speaker, but if they could get around that this would be the primary selling factor for me. I am issued a work phone to receive emails and text messages, but ultimately when something goes down and people hit the panic button they call. I work in IT so I pretty much have to have my phone with me 24/7 because of this.
4. Notifications: Being able to get notifications without your phone is a no-brainer. This one really goes without saying too much.
5. Navigation: Being able to use Apple or Google Map walking directions without having your phone would be nice, especially if you are in an area you don’t have your phone like a beach, water park, trail, etc. Apple Watch Series 2 already has GPS, so this would provide the much-needed map data.
6. Truly independent Apple Watch: Having LTE on the Apple Watch would make it so somebody who does not have an iPhone could use an Apple Watch pretty easily. Apps could pull their data directly over LTE instead of having to funnel it though the phone in this case.
7. Pokemon Go!: I would really dig being able to use the Pokemon Go Apple Watch app without having to bring my phone. Yeah, I could not catch Pokemon or Gym-battle, but I could visit Pokestops and hatch some eggs.
8. Podcasts: I would personally love this feature while I am out running. 95% of the time when I go for a run I listen to podcasts. This would also make it so that I would not have to sync 40–75MB podcasts to my Apple Watch throughout the week. OverCast introduced this feature last month to transfer podcasts, but it is so slow over the Apple’s Watch wireless chip that I don’t bother. Being able to stream podcasts would completely get around this.
9. Emergency Weather alerts. and SOS: Apple introduced their SOS feature in WatchOS 3 where you could hold down the Apple’s Watch’s side button for a number of seconds and will make a phone call to emergency services regardless of the area you are in. In the US it will call 911, but in other locations it will dial their emergency services even if you don’t know it. The only crux of this feature is you need the iPhone around to be able to use it. This would be a great feature for people in accidents or if they leave their phones behind to go running like I do in the wilderness. If I fall and break my leg with just my watch on some trail in the woods I’m SOL if I don’t have my iPhone with me. Emergency alerts like natural disasters and weather would also be useful if you don’t have your phone with you.

So, those are just a few ideas that come to mind when pondering what one could use LTE on an Apple Watch. It really boils down to whether Apple can implement the feature without completely destroying the Watch battery life and how much carriers want to charge for the feature. I don’t know if I would pay more than $10/month for the luxury for LTE on my Watch. $5 would be a no-brained, but I doubt that’s going to happen, carriers like to charge an arm and a leg for data.

Would any of this be necessary? Of course not, but neither is a smart watch in general. It would be an interesting proposition if I could leave my smartphone behind at home or in the car more often when I’m off work. I could still be connected for my job, but could be more distance between me and the digital distractions a smartphone can provide sometimes. That’s one of the things I like the most about the Apple Watch is the distance it puts between my digital life and the real world. I’m able to stay in the moment more often because often Apple Watch interactions are 3–5 seconds and there is not much you can do on a smart watch compared to a phone. You reply to the message or notification and go about your day. You can’t really get into a scenario that you reply to a text and end up answering 3x emails or browsing through Twitter. I did grow up in a time before smartphones were a thing and while I would never go back because I’m too much of a nerd, but I do enjoy spending time outside and exploring the world when I can. If I could be more in the moment while still being connected for work/personal reasons that would be nice. I would pay for that luxury if it worked well and I could use it all day without worrying.